The FCC One-to-One Consent Rule: Current Status
The FCC's one-to-one consent rule, which would have required a consumer to give separate consent to each individual seller before that seller could call or text them using an autodialer or prerecorded voice, was vacated by the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals on January 24, 2025, three days before it was scheduled to take effect. As of this writing, the rule is not in force. Multi-seller lead generation and comparison-shopping consent language, the practice the rule was written to eliminate, is once again governed by the general prior express written consent standard rather than a one-seller-per-consent mandate. That said, the FCC could still revisit the underlying policy through a new rulemaking, so operators who built one-to-one consent flows in anticipation of the rule are not wrong to keep them; they are simply no longer legally required to have them.
What the rule would have required
The FCC adopted the one-to-one consent order on December 13, 2023, as part of a broader package targeting lead generation practices in the TCPA space. The core provision, found in Part III.D of the order, did two things. First, it required that a single consumer consent authorize calls or texts from only one identified seller at a time, rather than the common lead-generation practice of listing dozens of "partners" on a single consent form and treating one checkbox as consent to all of them. Second, it added a requirement that the subject matter of any call or text be logically and topically associated with the interaction that prompted the consent, which would have barred a consent collected on one topic from being used to send offers in an unrelated category. Both provisions were aimed squarely at comparison-shopping websites and lead aggregators that sold a single consumer's information, along with a claim of consent, to many buyers at once.
The rule was set to take effect January 27, 2025.
The Eleventh Circuit vacates the rule
The Insurance Marketing Coalition, a trade association whose members include insurance companies, marketing organizations, and technology firms, petitioned for review, arguing the FCC exceeded its statutory authority under the TCPA. The Telephone Consumer Protection Act requires "prior express consent" for certain calls and, for some categories, "prior express written consent," but the statute itself does not define consent as needing to be seller-specific. The Eleventh Circuit agreed with that argument in Insurance Marketing Coalition Limited v. FCC, decided January 24, 2025. The court held that because the TCPA does not define "prior express consent," ordinary common-law consent principles apply, and a consumer can lawfully authorize communications from multiple sellers through a single, clearly given consent. The court found that the FCC's one-to-one and logically-and-topically-related requirements added restrictions the statute itself does not impose, exceeding the agency's authority. The panel vacated Part III.D of the FCC's order and remanded the matter to the agency.
The timing was close enough that the FCC separately issued an order the same day delaying the rule's effective date by twelve months, before the court's vacatur made that delay moot.
Timeline of the one-to-one consent rule
| Date | Event |
|---|---|
| December 13, 2023 | FCC adopts the order including the one-to-one consent and logically-and-topically-related requirements |
| January 24, 2025 | FCC separately orders a delay of the rule's effective date, postponing it by twelve months |
| January 24, 2025 | Eleventh Circuit issues Insurance Marketing Coalition Ltd. v. FCC, vacating Part III.D of the FCC order and remanding to the agency |
| January 27, 2025 | Original scheduled effective date passes with the rule vacated |
What consent standard applies now
With the one-to-one requirement vacated, the operative standard reverts to the general prior express written consent rules at 47 CFR 64.1200(a)(2), which predate the 2023 order and were not disturbed by the Eleventh Circuit's decision. That baseline standard requires a clear, unambiguous written agreement that specifies the number to be called or texted and confirms the consumer is not required to give consent as a condition of any purchase, for calls or texts made using an autodialer or prerecorded voice for marketing purposes. What the baseline standard does not require, post-vacatur, is that the consent name a single seller. A consumer can still validly authorize multiple named sellers through one signed form, provided the consent itself is clear about who may contact them and for what purpose. Operators building or reviewing opt-in forms should keep the underlying written-consent elements intact even though the one-to-one restriction is gone; the practical guidance for what a compliant opt-in form still needs is covered in SMS opt-in form best practices, and the difference between express and express written consent is explained in express versus written SMS consent.
Because the FCC was remanded the matter rather than told to abandon the policy entirely, it retains the option to try again with a narrower rule that survives the statutory-authority objection the Eleventh Circuit raised. Any organization relying on multi-seller consent forms should treat this as an area to monitor rather than a settled question, and should keep the current TCPA compliance checklist for 2026 in view for updates.
Why this only affects a narrow slice of TCPA compliance
It is easy to read "one-to-one consent vacated" as a general loosening of TCPA obligations, but the rule only ever touched multi-seller lead generation consent. It did not affect, and its vacatur does not change:
- The baseline requirement that autodialed or prerecorded marketing calls and texts need prior express written consent under 47 CFR 64.1200(a)(2)
- Do-not-call registry obligations under 47 USC 227(c)
- Revocation of consent requirements, which the FCC adopted separately and which took effect on their own schedule
- The Facebook v. Duguid definition of an automatic telephone dialing system, which is a wholly separate line of doctrine
- State-level consent and telemarketing laws, many of which are stricter than the federal floor and were not affected by the federal court's ruling
A company that only ever collected direct, single-seller consent for its own SMS program was never the target of the vacated rule and does not need to change anything as a result of this decision.
This article is general information, not legal advice. Requirements vary by jurisdiction and change over time, so confirm your own obligations with qualified counsel or the relevant regulator.
Frequently Asked Questions
Is the FCC one-to-one consent rule in effect?
No. The rule was vacated by the Eleventh Circuit in Insurance Marketing Coalition v. FCC on January 24, 2025, three days before it was scheduled to take effect. As of this writing, sellers are not required to obtain a separate, seller-specific consent from each consumer before calling or texting them.
What did the one-to-one consent rule require?
It would have required that a single consumer consent name and authorize only one specific seller, ending the practice of listing many "partners" on one consent form and treating a single checkbox as consent to be contacted by all of them. It also would have added a requirement that the subject matter of a call or text be logically and topically associated with the interaction that prompted the consent, barring the use of one consent for offers in an unrelated category.
Why did the Eleventh Circuit vacate the rule?
The court held that the TCPA's "prior express consent" language does not authorize the FCC to impose a seller-specific consent requirement, since the statute does not define consent that narrowly. Applying ordinary common-law consent principles, the court found a consumer can validly authorize multiple sellers through a single, clear consent, and vacated the FCC provision as exceeding the agency's statutory authority.
Does this mean multi-seller lead generation forms are automatically compliant?
No. The consent still has to satisfy the underlying prior express written consent standard at 47 CFR 64.1200(a)(2), meaning it must be clear, specify the number being authorized, and not be a condition of purchase. What changed is that the consent no longer has to name a single seller; it just still has to be genuine, informed consent.
Could the FCC bring back a one-to-one consent requirement?
It is possible. The Eleventh Circuit remanded the matter to the FCC rather than foreclosing the topic entirely, so the agency could attempt a narrower rule addressing the same lead-generation concerns in a way that fits within its statutory authority. Nothing has been adopted as of this writing.
Did the vacatur affect the TCPA's revocation of consent rules?
No. Revocation of consent requirements were adopted by the FCC in a separate order and proceed on their own effective-date schedule, unaffected by the Eleventh Circuit's ruling on one-to-one consent.
Does the one-to-one consent decision change autodialer liability under Facebook v. Duguid?
No. Those are two unrelated lines of TCPA doctrine. Facebook v. Duguid addresses what equipment counts as an automatic telephone dialing system; the one-to-one consent rule addressed how many sellers a single consent form could cover. The vacatur of the consent rule has no bearing on the autodialer definition.
What should a business do about its existing consent forms?
Confirm the consent language still meets the baseline prior express written consent requirements, since those were not affected by the vacatur. If a form was rebuilt specifically to be one-to-one in anticipation of the now-vacated rule, it can be left as is or relaxed back to a compliant multi-seller format; either approach is legally permissible under the current standard.
Consent tracking that keeps up with a moving rule
FRANSiS is an AI powered SMS platform that records the consent language, timestamp, and source for every opt-in, so when a rule like this one shifts you have a record of what standard your forms met at the time. To review your current opt-in setup, contact us.
